How is it legal for a judge to impose his religious beliefs onto a person? This
is nuts. I personally hate that name, but if somebody wants to use it, let them.
I can name my kid buddah, ala, or whatever else I want. There are hispanics with
the name Jesus... This is rediculous.

What an idiotic ruling. This judge clearly doesn't understand that she has
no business forcing her own religous views onto the people who come before her.
Today's names are often bizarre (to many of us) and unusual; why not be
able to use a title for a name, some people are using the names of fruits. The
article stated that Messiah is #4 these days as a child's name.

The interference by any governmentofficer, including a judge, in the selection
of a personal name for one's child is a right exercised by parents since
time immemorial. The judge's rationale, that the name "Messiah"
must be reserved for the one true Messiah, demonstrates prejudice against Jews,
who believe the Messiah has still not arrived. The word means
"Anointed" as in "Anointed Priest or King", and in Greek is
Christos, so every person in the world named "Chris" or "Kris"
or "Christian" is also bearing a name with a similar meaning. Whatever
appellate court has jurisdiction is going to reverse the ruling, and whatever
method they have in Tennessee to get rid of idiot judges who abuse their power
needs to be employed to get rid of this judge.

"A Scientist" seems to be claiming that "believers" are not
participating in an outcry about this ruling. But that doesn't seem to
square with the unanimous scorn shown in the comments above; surely some of
these folks are "believers," and they obviously have great disdain for
what the judge has done.

I'm a "believer"--a Christian
and a Latter-day Saint. I think the judge's ruling is absolutely
appalling. I believe and hope it won't stand.

"'A Scientist' seems to be claiming
that 'believers' are not participating in an outcry about this
ruling."

I am sorry you could not follow my comment. Read my
comment again. That is not what I claimed. I pointed out that this Judge's
ruling is "what in the public square looks like". This Judge is relying
on individual religious beliefs to make this judgement. That is what I have been
told believers want: the right to bring their personal religious faith into
"the public square" and have it influence their jobs, voting, education,
etc.

Good for you for condemning what this Judge has done. But that
means you are condemning this Judge's "religious freedom" - the
right to mingle religion with public office; the right to bring the Judge's
personal religious beliefs into the public square and the workplace.

'Child Support Magistrate' says it all. Unlike other judges, they
make religious rulings all the time. It can't be avoided in child custody
cases. How would you separate it? I do think the judge went a little far in
this case and it most likely will be overturned, not necessarily on religious
separation grounds, but because both parents had agreed on the first name. If
you think this is because Tennessee is a backwards state, not so. I dealt with a
judge in the Los Angeles courts that asked me what I prayed for, the night
before, as I sat on the witness stand.

Wow This is really an ignorant overreach by this judge.Is he aware
that Jesus is a common name in Spanish speaking countries?Is he also aware
that in Judaism, Christ is not the Messiah?This won't stand.